Thank you for the opportunity to volunteer and help our students. It has been wonderful and insightful to see their presentations. I hope my comments and suggestions can help them with their overall tournament journey and progress.

Lowell '25

dochendebatedocs@gmail.com

i'm currently debating for the Lowell policy team on the national circuit so I will most likely know what you are talking about.

Please be nice and respectful to each other, glhf

I'm the father of a participant.
This is my first time judging an event.
In fact this is my first time attending an event, so I'm not quite sure what to expect but I'll do my best.

siddharth.kohli@sonomaacademy.org

2a/1n

varsity @ sonoma '26

run anything and have fun! do technical debating and write my ballot!
Some debaters/ paradigms that have influenced me- Adam Martin, Jiyoon Park, Gibran Hassan, Mateo Mijares, Lani Frazer

Speaks:

• Put me on to fire music. If it's good +1 speak, if it's bad -1, if I've heard it before 0
• I’m a big Man United fan. Diss man city or liverpool and I’ll prob up ur speaks
• Make me/ your opponents laugh
• Think on your feet, interact with the flow, and have fun!

email me if you have any concerns or questions I should address

✌️

hi! i’ve debated varsity policy at college prep for 3 years now.

i don’t have much to say:

• tech > truth
• be nice people - i will start docking speaks if you are condescending or disrespectful
• be smart with your words and what arguments you run. nothing hateful pls
• CLARITY is key. go fast if you want but you must be clear - and i have high standards for what clarity is. i will clear you if you are impossible to understand.
• i will boost ur speaks if u recite the first line of the aeneid in dactylic hexameter

debate is a game. have fun! people will try to stress you out over competitive success. don’t be. enjoy research, argumentation; and debates. be funny and kind

????

Add me to the email chain: lowelldebatedocs@gmail.com AND ethanllee1247+debate@gmail.com

Please title the chains something along the lines of: Tournament Round # --- Team Code [AFF] v Team Code [NEG]

Junior from Lowell High School, I do lay debate and circuit debate as a 1A/2N. I am coached by Debnil Sur, so look to his paradigm for extra info. Prefer to not be called judge, "Ethan" is fine. I am likely not much older than you.

Tech over truth, but arguments need warrants.

Pls time your prep.

Don't be mean or do a bad -ism or -phobia.

For Lay: Only have a fast round if both teams agree to it. I will still evaluate these debates technically, but there should be more explanation of individual arguments.

Ethos matters - those who sound more persuasive will be more persuasive.

If there are any other questions, you can ask them before the round!

lowell 24’

lowelldebatedocs@gmail.com

tldr: i'm a vars debater and am comfortable with any speed. i don’t really care, do whatever you want. i would vote on anything if it’s debated well

novice:

advice i often find myself giving:

- time your own prep/speech/cx! i am not ur mother

- interact with your flow more - make sure to directly answer the opponents' arguments

- give ur speech in the order of ur opponents ! (case should always be in the order of the 1nc, everything else should be in order of 2ac)

general tech stuff:

- i default to sufficiency framing - huge risk of the da outweighs a low risk of the cp not being able to solve.

- i default judge kick, but you should tell me to just in case i forget.

- condo is cool! i have never judged a theory debate but i do find them hard to resolve in my own rounds sooo use lots of examples and you'll be more persuasive to me

- obv tech > truth, i'm very technical and am willing to vote on dropped things. make sure it has an impact and/or explain the implications of it in the context of the round

He/Him/His

Sonoma '25

Please add me to the chain Pmacievich.debate@gmail.com

I judge similarly to Adam Martin so check his paradigm too lol i also really like Joshua Michael's paradigm.

I will give my RFD somewhat quick so feel free to ask questions or send me emails after the round.

GGSA:

Hello friends, try to make the round fun, and don't worry too much about what happens. GGSA is the place to learn, so try to make the round reflect that. I will default to who technically won the debate, but if both teams want me to judge more like a parent I can do that too. I will love you if you can really explain your arguments well and do some work off of the flow instead of reading blocks. Please try to signpost in your speech if you can. Feel free to send me questions about the round after, I will give my decisions to yall in round so we can talk about it for a little bit.

GGSA does not technically want me to give my decision in round but if both teams agree, I will give it and we can talk about it.

Judge Philosophy:

Tech>>>>>>Truth

I will judge like a robot, I will vote for any argument that you make as long as it is explained and you show me why it matters. There is a limit to this, I will not vote for racist/homophobic or other discriminatory args and will probably drop you for it.

Case: I think that case is underutilized in almost 100% of rounds, I love to see a good neg team dismantle the aff and will write my ballot on presumption easily if you explain why the aff can't solve.

DAs:I love a good DA debate and think that a case specific DA is one of if not the strongest things to beat for the aff. Case o/w and accesses the DA and vice versa are very convincing if argued well.

CPs: I am not hugely well educated in the world of CPs, I will vote for the most illegitimate counterplan you can think of or a very legit advantage CP. Delay CPs and consult CPs are probably abusive but I will vote for it if you win it.

K: I basically only read Ks, so I will probably understand what you are talking about but please explain your arg. Framework is super important for both teams. I am probably a great judge for a K debate because I will vote on anything but I generally think that links of omission are somewhat weak. I will vote exclusively for one side's framework interpretation and not a weird arbitrary middle ground. Fairness is not an intrinsic good, explain why it matters.

T: Read it, Go for it, I don't really have any special thoughts, except that you need to impact out fairness if that is what you are going for. Fairness is NOT an intrinsic good, and if you don't tell me why it matters you will lose.

Cheaty things: Please don't steal prep, it's really obvious when people do it and it ruins your ethos. Please don't clip intentionally, I'll drop you if it's over the top. If you mark cards please send out a doc to me and your opponents.

Lastly, Have fun, enjoy yourselves, and make the round interesting to judge.

About Me

Varsity policy at Sonoma. 1A/2N (best position). Don't waste time trying to adapt to me as a judge, run whatever you do best.

Don't read args endorsing racism/sexism/promoting self harm. Death theory/pessimism/wipeout etc. is fine.

Put me on the chain - amossdebate@gmail.com

TKO

If you believe the other team made a mistake that makes winning impossible(dropping T or a solvent CP), you can end the round, explain to me why they lost, and if I agree you will auto win with 30s. If I think you were wrong, you lose with 27s

TLDR

Policy------------------X---------------------------K

Tech------X-----------------------------------------Truth

Conditionality good--X----------------------------Conditionality bad

UQ matters most----------------------X----------Link matters most

Try or die--------------x---------------------------What's the opposite of try or die

Clarity-X--------------------------------------------Sounding like a faucet

Good ev-------------x----------------------------More ev

AT: -X------------------------------------------------------ A2:

For good speaks :)

Aggressive cx is good as long as it isn't rude - fine line

Be kind and funny, debate is a game

Be organized

Rebuttals off the flow are good

Having a cool fit

Hello, I am a parent judge, and this is my first-year judging.

-Please speak at a normal pace and eye contact would be nice.

-Make clear and understandable arguments.

-Provide justification for your arguments.

-Not familiar with topicality and kritiks, but if they are explained well, I can vote for them.

-Provide a road map of your speech and clearly articulate your talking points. Try not to jump around too much.

-Please be respectful and professional.

Don't forget to breathe and have fun!

lowell

sabrina.toeee@gmail.com | lowelldebatedocs@gmail.com

i'm good for circuit or lay, just lmk. definitely ask me about anything else!

note: im not your finest k girlie. feel free to go for it though, i know enough!

+ 0.1 for telling me your favorite taylor swift song !!!!

Email: lukas.updegraff@sonomaacademy.org

You can call me Lukas in-round.

Personal- Varsity debater at Sonoma Academy. Do what you do best. Trying to adapt to me as a judge is a waste of time. I will vote for (*almost) any argument you run as long as you do it well.

*Obviously no racism/sexism/death good. Also, do not hide theory. Put it in the doc. I will not vote on hidden theory in novice, its abusive.

Tech>Truth

Time your own speeches.

Arguments are claims, warrants, and impacts -- means that "dropped" arguments are true only if you explain why they matter and the reasons they're true. Often debaters forget the impact part of this. I need more explanation than just "they dropped the DA- we win!"

Online debate: I'll have my camera on at all times during speeches and CX. I will turn my camera off after the 2AR while making my decision and turn it back on once I'm in. I'd prefer that you have your camera on while speaking but its your choice.

Novice Debate: Have fun! Ask questions! Your first year should be about education, not competition. This activity relies on tons of jargon and uncharted territory for many, so if any part of my decision does not make sense, please do not hesitate to ask questions. Plan debate is likely more conducive to education in this format. Oftentimes these debates come down to who explains their arguments better in the final rebuttals and gives me more ink to work with during my decision-making. Comparative analysis is key and will win you a lot of debates at this level (see below)

I will always make the least interventionary ballot possible. It is to your benefit that you frame the debate clearly in the final speeches. I want to hear "Even if our opponents are winning this... we can still win.... which o/w because....".

Especially in novice, engagement with the flow is going to help you so much in getting my ballot. All too often teams just read their blocks at me and have little in-round engagement with the opposite team. I understand it can be overwhelming when you first start debate, but don't be afraid to make up your own arguments outside of the pre-written ones.

For good speaks

HUMOUR

Literally be nice and courteous to your opponents

Compare evidence without relying on value judgements ("their evidence is bad/old").

Organized speech docs

Solo cross (partner can help 1 or 2 questions but should be mainly yours)

Keeping the round light and friendly

For bad speaks :(

Rambling in cross or avoiding question (may be strategic for you but will hurt speaks)

Making random snarky comments

Hi, I'm a senior

Please be nice to each other

jvuong2@thecollegepreparatoryschool.org

i'm fine with tag cx if everyone else is too (please ask other team before doing it)

Please recite the first 7 lines of the Aeneid, in Latin, in meter for +0.001 speaker points.

Tech > truth

clarity > speed

i love funditionality, i think its really fun

she/her/hers

sonoma '25

caroline.young@sonomaacademy.org

1a/2n, debater at Sonoma! Currently under my queen Adam Martin and formerly under my god, my spirit animal, Lani Frazer, DoF, Rest in Peace.

TLDR:

Tech> truth in most cases. I don't care what you read, as long as you like it and you are having a fun time in the round. I have zero tolerance for any homophobic, sexist, racist, or other harmful argument. Running them will result in an L and 0 speaks. I love it when people are funny and make the round less tense! Debate is a game, don't take it too seriously. I will not adjudicate issues that happened outside of the round; anything that happened before the round is not my problem to adjudicate. Random but I love Georgia font. If you make you're whole doc in Georgia font I will love you.

I will always try and keep my RFDs as snappy as possible, but please ask me questions in round if you have them regarding how I made my decision (as long as you are nice about it!). You can also feel free to email me after the tournament!

For GGSA1: Have fun and learn as much as you can. This is the best place to learn and try new things, take some risks and see how it goes! Be nice to each other please, I really dislike people who are mean in round. I am fine with speed, but I would prefer you to be more clear than fast. Please label your arguments on the doc and signpost in your speeches! It makes flowing the round so much cleaner and is much appreciated.

If you need anything before the round (pronouns, accessibility, etc that I should be aware of) please please shoot me an email or find me on campus!

Long Version

Case:I think aff teams too often forget about the case debate and get too tripped up in whatever whack moves the neg is making. Remember that case is there for a reason and it probably outweighs any hack K or weird CP that the neg reads.

T:Violations are a reason to reject the arg, not the team, but they're can be exceptions. Generally won't reject the team unless it's thoroughly explained why I am rejecting the team. Affs on the topic should probably tax and transfer, but I can be convinced otherwise.

Framework is pretty straightforward. Standards are a classic, and often outweigh the aff framework. Don't let the K hacks push you over with their impact turn bs, because your standards are probably true and probably outwiegh. Tell me why thats true! Don't just tell me that the round was unfair because they read a K aff, tell me HOW that has implicated your ability to debate in this round. I think framework can be really strong if coupled with some nice case cards that respond to their K, and is an asset that can probably be won versus most K affs.

Ks: for you K slime like me!!! Now is your chance! Break free from the shackles of policy debate!!! I love K lit and only read K args, so I will probably be familiar with the lit that you read in round. That being said, I will do no work for you in terms of understanding exactly what you are critiquing. You need to actually explain to me what you are critiquing, what the link to the aff is (not just a link of omission) and tell me how that outweighs. I will vote on death being a jump between quantum timelines if you explain to me why its true. My limit is death good; I know this is becoming more popular, please don't run it in front of me :)

K Affs: Love them!!!! I enjoy a good song or poem in the 1AC, but I enjoy you explaining why they are aplicable to your critique even more :) I have a high threshold for 1AC CX, and you will get docked speaks for being vague just to be strategic. I can be convinced of anything if you actually explain why your claim is true. Debate could be bad, but I wont believe so if you dont tell me why.

DA/CP:I don't have overly strong opinions on disads or counterplans. I'm not the best judge for high level Da/CP debating, but I can get behind a good politics DA.

Other:

+.1 speak if you make a Justin Bieber reference in your speech.

Let me know if you have any questions about my OP paradigm. Shoot me an email before the round if you want me to be aware of access needs, pronouns, etc. have fun :)